stutue
BANNED
- Apr 22, 2014
- 875
- 0
- 0
You are posing a rhetorical question.
You don't know other people's answers, but yours is that he was doping but now isn't because somehow the risks are suddenly greater for some unpublicized reason.
Meanwhile previous doper Wiggins seems to be doing just fine off the juice (for the same reason as Porte).
Hmmm. Not a theory that sits very comfortably with the facts, does it.
Maybe the doping (or not doping) is irrelevant and he's just having a bad early season after emptying himself last year.
Passes the probability test for me, and we are still none the wiser as to whether he dopes or not.
You don't know other people's answers, but yours is that he was doping but now isn't because somehow the risks are suddenly greater for some unpublicized reason.
Meanwhile previous doper Wiggins seems to be doing just fine off the juice (for the same reason as Porte).
Hmmm. Not a theory that sits very comfortably with the facts, does it.
Maybe the doping (or not doping) is irrelevant and he's just having a bad early season after emptying himself last year.
Passes the probability test for me, and we are still none the wiser as to whether he dopes or not.
